I welcome the Taoiseach agreeing to investigate the hiring activities of a PR consultant by Deputy Cullen, the former Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, dealing with approximately €300,000 as well as eight foreign trips. Today he needs to investigate the spending of €800 million, also under Deputy Cullen's watch as current Minister for Transport, relating to the upgrading of the M50. That is a cost which appears to be escalating, even as we speak. According to the environmental impact study from the NRA the upgrade will result in the road being congested from the time it opens, which calls into question how public money is being spent. I remind the House that the genesis of this particular saga, starting on 16 July 2003, commenced with the former Minister for Transport, Deputy Brennan, stating that the M50 upgrade was not an immediate prospect. Then there was the embarrassment of the Red Cow roundabout going up on stilts, quickly followed on 21 October by the Joint Committee on Transport hearing from what is often termed "the Fianna Fáil NRA organisation" citing €316 million as the cost of an upgrade if it was to proceed. That escalated on 10 February 2004, with the same organisation citing €590 million as the cost of the work. Now, at the oral hearing which is proceeding today as we speak, there is an indication the cost will be €807 million.

There is a clear need to get a firm grip on the escalating cost of over-runs before any construction commences. We are dealing here with the oral hearing. Has the Taoiseach read about Mr. Tim Corcoran, the M50 project co-ordinator telling my colleague, Deputy Eamon Ryan, the Green Party spokesman on transport, that the motorway's upgrade depends on the metro going ahead as well as other public transport being in place, as in the Dublin Transportation Office's "Platform for Change" plan? Where then stands the Government as regards the decision on the metro, which seems to be in abeyance? What about the pleas of county managers such as Fingal's demanding a decision on the metro this January before a proper development plan can be made by the local authority which relates to the administrative area? Will the Taoiseach inquire into this escalating cost and will he make a decision on the metro so there is some comprehensive planning on transport?

These questions cover the entire public transport issue——

They are about cost.

——and about cost. The National Development Plan 2000-2006 is investing approximately €2.8 billion in public transport. I know the Deputy meant to mention the other aspects, but ran out of time. Perhaps I will take up those. The Heuston station project was completed at the end of last year.

The Taoiseach, without interruption, please.

There are 76 new rail cars coming into service, a capacity increase on rail routes, such as the Dundalk-Drogheda, the Arklow route, the Maynooth——

What about the M50?

Public transport.

That is not the question.

Deputy Sargent is the only leader of the Green Party and as such, the only Member entitled to ask a supplementary question, when he is called, of course.

The Taoiseach should tell the House about Cork station.

Answer the question.

The Deputy is not the leader of the Green Party.

The question was about the M50.

The Taoiseach, without interruption.

The answer as regards the M50 is easy. As the Deputy knows there is a hearing regarding the M50 and we are awaiting the outcome.

The cost is going up.

We must first await the conclusion of the hearing. I know Deputy Sargent is against all roads.

I am not against all roads. I am against improper costs.

The Deputy is against the building of all roads.

The Taoiseach is against all metros.

He has asked me about the N3, which is——

I did not ask about the N3.

He did. He mentioned that, too.

Will the Taoiseach answer the question?

What about the metro?

The Minister will make a decision on the metro in the new year.

Will it be in January?

What other roads does the Deputy wish to hear about?

The M50.

Will the Taoiseach inquire into the cost over-run?

I will request Members of the Green Party to allow their leader, only, to be involved in Question Time, and only when he is called by the Chair.

I am trying to answer the questions one by one for the Deputy as he is asking them. We have also been spending €600 million over the last number of years on rail safety. I am sure the Deputy has noticed Luas is now up and running.

We have also spent an enormous amount on new buses as well and the Balbriggan bypass, which is in the Deputy's constituency and is enormously successful. The remainder of the road on which he goes home every evening has also been built since he came into the House——

On a bicycle.

There are very few bicycle lanes.

——so I hope he has a happy Christmas.

I thought this was to be a question and answer session. The fact the Ceann Comhairle has no control over the answer is being abused.

The Chair will not condone interruptions.

The Ceann Comhairle should take seriously the fact that he is being insulted in that answers are not being given when questions are asked.

Is that a question?

Once again, will the Taoiseach say whether he is in any way concerned that the NRA comes into a committee with a price tag of €316 million to win political support for a project and as soon as that support is confirmed, the price creeps up and is fast approaching €1 billion?

Is that not of any concern to the Government which is supposed to be in charge of public funding when there are so many other needs that require spending? Will the Taoiseach inquire into that? Will he take decisive action on transport planning rather than just rattle off a list of solitary projects that hang together as some sort of Christmas shopping list?

The Deputy's minute has concluded.

Will he decommission the NRA and try to re-integrate it into normal democratic society? Will he establish a national transport authority, put the RPA and the NRA together and let us have cohesive and co-ordinated transport planning?

How many questions is that?

At the moment, the NRA is social welfare for road engineers.

Hear, hear.

And for archaeologists.

The NRA was set up in the first place so that we could build roads on an independent basis and so that it would not be just the Minister and his Department building them.

Yes, but for roads only.

Then we had to deal with the Department of Transport. Early guesstimates of road plans are just that. There are no budget figures until they go out to tender or until full designs of the location of the road are carried out. The Deputy is asking me why the figures for the NRA are escalating, yet he stated two weeks ago that he was completely against the position of the roads. How can the NRA know the cost of roads when we cannot get a fixed position on it?

It will not be running advertisements about it at any rate.

Allow the Taoiseach without interruption.

When the NRA knows where the road is and what size it is——

Does the NRA know where the M50 is?

If this House keeps complaining about it——

As I understand it, the Clonee-Kells project comprises the construction of 49 km of motorway, of over 14 km of single carriageway and has an estimated cost of around €820 million in January 2004 prices. It is to be implemented as a toll-based PPP project.

This is not the answer.

This has nothing to with the question.

There is only one leader in each party. The Deputies should leave the questions to their leaders.

There should be no motorways near Stonehenge.

There is no full scheme yet from the NRA on what will happen with the M50. It has not given full costs on it.

It will cost even more.

There is a hearing on it with An Bord Pleanála. Until that is decided and until the NRA knows it has full planning permission, full engineering costs will not be decided. That is how it happens.

It will be over €1 billion.

The Deputy wants hearings and investigations, then he wants costs and estimates.

How wrong can the NRA be?

Let us go through the process. The process on the M50 is that An Bord Pleanála, which is independent, will make its decision. I know that if it makes a positive decision, the Deputy will claim it was not a good decision and his party will be off to the courts. The Deputy and his party should be honest and say they are opposed to it.